Re: [HACKERS] Temp Table Memory Leak

> Kristofer Munn <kmunn@munn.com> writes:
> > I've created a sample case that reproduces the error that I will attach
> > with this message.  Basically, I create a 50 column temp table (with no
> > rows in it) and then run updates on each column in succession.  The
> > backend gets large pretty quick - I'm seeing about 12Megs after running
> > the enclosed script which does an update on all 50 columns 3 times (150
> > updates).
> 
> I confirm the leak in 6.5.* --- but I see no leak in current sources.

Great.  Now the big question is should we backpatch, and if so do we
want a 6.5.4.  I know you(Tom) have put a number of patches into the
6.5.* branch, and we are at least 2 months away from our next release.

Comments?

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026